Critique of Bohm's "active information" in quantum theory

In my books I have referenced Paavo Pylkkanen’s work. In this blog post I will discuss points he has made in his article, “Implications of Bohmian Quantum Ontology for Psychopathology,” presented in NeuroQuantology, March 2010, Vol. 8, pp 37-48. Specifically, I will discuss points he makes about Bohm’s proposal that “active information” in the ontological interpretation of quantum theory plays a role as a bridge between mind and matter. Pylkkanen states that “some such bridge is needed if we are able to understand how mental processes are able to influence physical processes in the brain. . . .”

Bohm postulates that “an electron is a new kind of entity that has always both a particle aspect and a wave aspect. . . that the electron is a particle always accompanied and guided by a new type of field . . . [that] contains something he calls “active information”. . . . The field gives rise to a potential, which Bohm called the “quantum potential,” [or Q in his mathematical equations]. . . . the field literally IN FORMS (or puts form into the energy of the particle”, giving direction to its trajectory. “At the quantum level information . . . actively guides the movement of particles.”

Bohm states that the quantum potential, Q, itself consists of “active information” and is “mind like,” and the question is asked how this information content acts upon matter. Pylkkanen states that “in the context of the human mind we could speculate that information contained in mental processes and conscious experience is carried by some subtle medium,” in this case the quantum potential. Thus, information is reduced to a quantum entity rather than being generated by a mind, a point made in my books and recent blog posts. Bohm wrote in 1990 “that which we experience as mind, in its movement through various levels of subtlety, will, in a natural way ultimately move the body by reaching to the level of the quantum potential and of the ‘dance of the particles.’ . . . some kind of information is the bridge” between the mind and matter. In contrast, I have cited Dembski who identified energy as the “causal glue” between information and matter, and information can only be generated by an immaterial mind. Bohm “suggests that minds are very subtle but adds that it is a mistake to assume that minds are entirely non-physical. . . . every mental process has a subtle physical aspect which carries the information that is part of the essence of that process.” And the “physical aspect” resides in the quantum potential, Q.

I have asked IF the immaterial cognitive mind can interact with Q (if it truly exists) to give direction to the trajectory of wave forms generated by the mind and transmitted as encoded spike trains of action potentials through synaptic networks via quantum tunneling. Pylkkanen states, “By controlling the shape of the quantum field, the ‘mind’ can control the movement [and direction] of particles, such as electrons.” Pylkkanen looked for sites in the brain “where amplification of quantum effects is likely to play a role in determining more macroscopic neural behavior (e.g. resulting in the activation of motor neurons). He and his associate Hiley “considered Beck and Eccles’s quantum model of synaptic exocytosis from the point of view of the ontological interpretation. We wrote there: ‘. . . [the] action of the quantum potential effectively reduces the height of the barrier to increase the probability of exocytosis. Thus we could regard the ‘mind-field’ as initiating a subsequent neural process which finally activates the motor neurons to produce the outward behavior. In this sense, active information is merely the trigger for the usual classical processes that follow the gating of ion channels.” However, Eccles and Beck considered quantum tunneling as the “trigger” for exocytosis. Specified information with meaning and purpose resided within encoded spike trains of action potentials transmitted through synaptic networks. Information is not the trigger.